Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Clark.

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 1 November 2022.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 1 November 2022 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

To receive from members, declarations of interest in relation to any items included on the agenda for this meeting, in accordance with the Waverley Code of Local Government Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest raised under this heading.

The Chairman to respond to any questions received from members of the public for which notice has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 10.

The deadline for receipt of questions is 5pm on Tuesday 22 November 2022.

The Executive received the following question(s) in accordance with Part 4.9 (Public Speaking Procedure Rules).

(i)            From Mr Chris Whitley of Witley the Jewellers

“Would the Council agree with the many shop keepers and businesses in the High Street and Church Street that the removal of most of the public spaces from Crown Court car park would be disastrous for their survival and the centre of Godalming as a whole?

Would they also agree that the siting of a large multi storey car park on the edge of town and opposite the Llamas lands, would be less easy and convenient to use, would create an eyesore and would be a place that would attract anti-social behaviour?”

Response from Councillor Mary Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets

“Can I thank Mr Whitley for his question and in fact we’re grateful to all of the businesses, groups, organisations and residents who’ve engaged with us constructively on the engagement on this project since this preliminary round of the engagement started.

Firstly, I should note that I can only respond to Mr Whitley’s question on behalf of the Executive and not for the whole Council, and I’ll also be updating members more broadly on the raw data generated from the engagement slightly later on in this meeting.

We’ve stressed at every opportunity that we’ve been engaging only on in-principle concepts and of those only ones that address our critical success factors which include no net loss to public car parking in the town centre.  This is precisely because we at least also recognised, from the outset, that a net reduction of public parking spaces in the town centre could be harmful and especially so to the regeneration of the high street.   And that is precisely why we’ve only engaged on options that maintain the number of spaces in the town centre.

There are good reasons for, and many elements to this project across all 3 sites, but specific to just the Crown Court cap park the concepts we’ve engaged on envisage retaining about 1/3 of the existing spaces and repositioning the others to a low-profile decked car park which could be built to replace the existing north-western wing of the current Council office building about 100 yards away.

There are no definite plans, let alone designs, for any multi-deck car park at this stage so there’s nothing to definitively prejudge how it may or may not look or be secured.  We’ve heard a range of opinions as to convenience among other things and I’ll be updating members on that feedback a little later in this meeting.

Thank you.”

The Chairman to respond to any questions received from Members in accordance with Procedure Rule 11.

The deadline for receipt of questions is 5pm on Tuesday 22 November 2022.

Question received from Councillor Jenny Else to the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets:

“I would like to know WHY the name of the proposal for changes to Crown Car Park and the Burys site was changed from "The Burys Project" to "Godalming regeneration' when it is not a 'regeneration' of Godalming at all?

Was it anything to do with the criteria to validate a potential application for a government loan, to implement the project.?”

The Executive received the following question(s) in accordance with Procedure Rule 11:

(i)            From Councillor Jenny Else

“I would like to know WHY the name of the proposal for changes to Crown Car Park and the Burys site was changed from "The Burys Project" to "Godalming regeneration' when it is not a 'regeneration' of Godalming at all?

Was it anything to do with the criteria to validate a potential application for a government loan, to implement the project.?”

Response from Councillor Mark Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets

“Can I thank Cllr Else for this question but for the record can I also note that the correct name of this project is the Central Godalming Regeneration Project and is not about any regeneration of the whole town in its entirety.

So, Members will recall that in 2019 we inherited a project from the last Conservative administration which had, amongst other things, commissioned and scoped a Council Office Accommodation Strategy & Options Evaluation report from Lambert Smith Hampton that was the subject of a detailed response that I gave to a question from Kathy Smyth at the Executive on 1 November.

Back then the project was referred to as The Burys Accommodation Project or just The Burys Project for short.  But, as we assessed this work in the context of our own priorities it also became clear that it contained two very different workstreams that needed to be considered independently and so the so-called “where work happens” stream was spun-off which, with the onset of the Covid lockdown, turned out to be doubly helpful.

While the remaining stream did continue to be referred to as The Burys Project for a while, as we scoped Phase 1 it became clear that our priorities were so different from those we’d inherited that a change of name would be appropriate in order to record the clear distinctions between the two, and I’ve previously referred to some of these, including:

-          Ruling out the sale of the Council’s land, including Burys Field;

-          The protection of car parking spaces in the town centre, and

-          The provision, by us, of genuinely affordable housing.

So it was that when we commissioned our own Phase 1 study we adopted the name “Burys Development Project” in July 2020.  But, as the most viable concepts and options emerged from this and the deeper Phase 2 studies, it became clearer still that this name didn’t adequately capture the balance of the project’s elements beyond just the development of the Council offices and so, as we prepared for the presentation of the Phase 2 outcomes to residents in the public engagement in preparation for Phase 3, we felt that the name of the project should also evolve to reflect this, which was done at the same time in July of this year.

Of course it’s not only the Public Works Loan Board criteria that have changed since the last Conservative administration realised that this Council faced long-term structural inequalities  ...  view the full minutes text for item EXE 55/22

The Leader and Portfolio Holders gave brief updates on current issues not reported elsewhere on the agenda:

·       Councillor MacLeod gave an update on enforcement issues and advised that a new Private Sector Housing Enforcement Policy would be brought to the Executive.  This would also cover housing associations and was relevant due to the sad news of the death of a young child in Rotherham due to the conditions he was living in.  Public Space Protection Orders would also be reviewed, and this covered dog fouling and dog controls.  Parking income had returned to approximately 80% of pre-Covid levels, mainly in the larger central car parks.  The bring areas had been removed from some of the central car parks due to fly tipping and the space would be returned to car parking.  There had been a number of complaints about Crest Nicholson contractors working on the Brightwells development parking in the sports centre car park and this would be raised with them at the Brightwells board meeting and an alternative would be considered.

·       Councillor Penny Marriott gave an update on the monitoring of the implementation of the corporate equality objectives action plan by the Corporate Equalities group.  Further initiatives would be brought to the Executive for consideration.  The Safer Waverley Partnership Plan had been reviewed by Overview and Scrutiny and would be considered again by the Safer Waverley Partnership Executive.

·       Councillor Merryweather asked the Council’s Development Programme Manager to give a presentation on the responses received in the public engagement on the Central Godalming Regeneration Project, the slides of which are attached to these minutes and the video would be available on the Council’s website.  He thanked the officers for their work in collating and analysing the responses and concluded by highlighting the financial pressures that the Council was under that necessitated considering this type of project.  The Leader thanked officers for their work and reminded the meeting that the engagement carried out was not statutory consultation, rather the Executive were keen to engage with residents as much as possible.  The designs and concepts would be considered in light of both feedback received and the economic climate.

·       Councillor Mirylees updated on the leisure centre procurement.  Bids had been received which would be scrutinised and negotiations would begin in late December.  Leisure centres were being used as warm hubs for residents to access during the winter.

·       Councillor Paul Rivers updated on the work being carried out in the Housing Service in response to the Secretary of State’s letter following the death of a two year old in Rotherham due to mould in his family home.  All social landlords would have to submit evidence that they have appropriate controls in place to deal with this issue and officers were reviewing their processes with a report to the Landlord Services Advisory Board in February.

·       Councillor Liz Townsend advised that the economic development team had been working with high streets to support them with top-up funds for festive activities to improve footfall.  A joint Guildford  ...  view the full minutes text for item EXE 56/22

The Leader advised that item 10 would be taken immediately after item 8 as both related to the Housing Revenue Account.  For ease of reference, the items appear below in the order in which they appeared on the agenda.

This report outlines the latest projections for the MTFP.  It highlights the emerging pressures on the General Fund Revenue budget which have been identified at the time of writing and estimates their financial impact on the Council’s services and finances.

This report is authored in the context of extraordinary economic uncertainty, volatility. The risks facing the General Fund finances (to the extent that they’ve been identified) are presented to alert members to further threats to achieving the MTFP. For completeness, it should also be noted that, while the scope of this report doesn’t extend to either the HRA or the Council’s corporate “capital” projects these are subject to the same economic factors and are being monitored separately.

This report contains the following Annexes:

·       Annexe 1 – Q2 Performance Summary

·       Annexe 2 – Inflation Position Statement

·       Annexe 3 – Updated General Fund MTFP

Recommendation

That the Executive:

        i.             note the 2022/23 forecast position General Fund

       ii.             note the emerging pressures and risks set out in the report

     iii.             note the position regarding the General Fund capital programme and individual capital projects

RESOLVED that

     1.          the 2022/23 forecast position General Fund be noted;

     2.          the emerging pressures and risks set out in the report be noted; and

     3.          the position regarding the General Fund capital programme and individual capital projects be noted.

Reason:

The annual General Fund budget is a major decision for the Council and setting a balanced budget is a statutory requirement. The worsening economic climate necessitates a review of the MTFP in the light of its financial impacts on the council: the Council must act quickly to ensure the risk of a net budget shortfall is addressed so that the Council can continue to function.

This report follows up on actions identified in the outturn report agreed by Executive in July. Scrutiny of this MTFP through a Mid-Year Review demonstrates transparency and good governance.

[This report is for noting and therefore not subject to call-in]

Councillor Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets presented the report which set out the current position with the General Fund and the result of the Medium Term Financial Plan mid-year review.  The report was presented in the context of the financial pressures on the Council and the financial projections had been updated to reflect the rises in inflation.  The Council had limited ability to increase income and therefore the Council had to choose whether to cut services or pass the cost on to residents.  It was noted that the Government had increased the amount by which local authorities could raise council tax, however what was needed was a fully funded financial settlement from the Government.

The Leader thanked the officers involved and urged the Government to provide local authorities with financial certainty.  Councillor Mulliner spoke on this item, expressing concern over the question marks in the report and seeking clarification on the impact of energy costs on leisure centres.  In response, Councillor Merryweather agreed that the uncertainty was not helpful and looked forward to receiving clarification from the Government.

RESOLVED that

     1.          the 2022/23 forecast position General Fund be noted;

     2.          the emerging pressures and risks set out in the report be noted; and

     3.          the position regarding the General Fund capital programme and individual capital projects be noted.

Reason:

The annual General Fund budget is a major decision for the Council and setting a balanced budget is a statutory requirement. The worsening economic climate necessitates a review of the MTFP in the light of its financial impacts on the council: the Council must act quickly to ensure the risk of a net budget shortfall is addressed so that the Council can continue to function.

This report follows up on actions identified in the outturn report agreed by Executive in July. Scrutiny of this MTFP through a Mid-Year Review demonstrates transparency and good governance.

This report sets out the revised Housing Revenue Account Business Plan strategy following the completion of the strategic review commissioned in February 2022.

This report contains the following Annexes:

·                 Annexe 1 – HRA Business Plan 2022/23 to 2052/53 

·                 Annexe 2 – Housing Reserves

·                 Annexe 3 – Housing New Build Summary

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Executive, after considering the comments from the Landlord Services Advisory Board and Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee, make the following recommendations to Council, that:

1.     To approve the revised HRA business plan strategy set out in this report.

2.     To approve the proposed movements, restrictions and purposes of reserves as set out in annexe 2.

RESOLVED that the Executive, after considering the comments from the Landlord Services Advisory Board and Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee, recommends to Council:

1.               To approve the revised HRA business plan strategy set out in this report.

2.               To approve the proposed movements, restrictions and purposes of reserves asset out in annexe 2.

Reason:

To provide the resources to fund Waverley Borough Council’s Landlord Services operations, maintenance programme, zero carbon commitments and building new affordable homes on a long-term financially sustainable basis.

[This is a recommendation to Council and therefore not subject to call-in]

Councillor Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets presented the report which set out the current position with the Housing Revenue Account.  The report set out the same structural and economic risks as the previous report on the agenda.  The Government had announced a cap on the amount by which social rent could be raised at 7%, however the Council’s intention would be to shield its tenants from a big rise in rents and limit any increase to 4%.  He thanked the officers involved for their work; and the members of the Landlord Services Advisory Board and the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  The Leader echoed the thanks and welcomed the constructive engagement with the tenants.

Councillor Mulliner spoke on the report, highlighting that it would have been helpful to see the inflationary pressures spelled out in the report in terms of the impact on current costs.  If rents were only increased by 4% it would reduce the ability of the HRA to fund itself and not rely on future borrowing.  He suggested a simpler way of explaining the financial analysis.

The Leader voiced concern over the restrictions placed on local government by central government in respect of building social housing.  He thanked the officers in the Housing team for their work.

In response, Councillor Merryweather clarified that the rents received were ringfenced for the operation, building and maintenance of new social housing.  The cost of decarbonisation existing social housing would also need to be resolved.  The Leader advised that he and Councillor Williams had written to the Government to seek clarification on how local authorities will fund the work required to meet Government targets on energy efficiency. 

RESOLVED that the Executive, after considering the comments from the Landlord Services Advisory Board and Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee, recommends to Council:

1.               To approve the revised HRA business plan strategy set out in this report.

2.               To approve the proposed movements, restrictions and purposes of reserves asset out in annexe 2.

Reason:

To provide the resources to fund Waverley Borough Council’s Landlord Services operations, maintenance programme, zero carbon commitments and building new affordable homes on a long-term financially sustainable basis.

In February 2022 the government announced a package of support known as the Energy Rebate to help households with rising energy bills. The scheme includes a £150 rebate to all properties in council tax band A-D with criteria set by the government (the main scheme). The announcement includes a discretionary fund to support other financially vulnerable energy bill payers not covered under the main scheme, or to provide carefully ‘top-up’ payments to the most vulnerable households. The Executive approved the local discretionary scheme on 7^th June.

Under the current eligibility criteria of the local Discretionary Scheme only 47% of the £216,000 available funding been paid out so far.  Any unspent funding by 30 November 2022 will be required to be repaid back to government. This reports sets out an addendum to the Waverley Discretionary Energy Rebate Scheme to enable the remaining £114,600 funding to be passed on to households.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Executive approve an addendum to the Discretionary Energy Rebate Scheme under the eligibility criteria as follows:

The fund can also be used to give an award to any pensioners who are in receipt of Council Tax Support without the need for an application process.  This will result in 2,000 awards of £55, to each pensioner.

RESOLVED that an addendum to the Discretionary Energy Rebate Scheme under the eligibility criteria be approved as follows:

The fund can also be used to give an award to any pensioners who are in receipt of Council Tax Support without the need for an application process.  This will result in 2,000 awards of £55, to each pensioner.

Reason:

Waverley has been allocated discretionary funding of £216,600 to support those suffering financial hardship as a result of the rising energy cost. In the event of an overspend, no additional funding will be provided from government. Therefore, the discretionary scheme criteria was set to support the most vulnerable that has not had a payment from the main scheme. The remaining funding can now be targeted to pensioners as a small topup without the need for an application process. 

The scheme is widely published and available on the Waverley website. It is promoted by officers from Council Tax, Benefits, Housing, Communication and by local charities and councillors.

[This decision was taken under urgency procedures and is therefore not subject to call-in]

Councillor Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets presented the report which set out a proposal to amend the Discretionary Energy Rebate Scheme which would release £114,600 to be passed on to vulnerable households, which would otherwise have to be returned to the Government.

Councillor Hyman spoke on this item expressing concern over giving away public money.  In response, the Leader welcomed the opportunity to redistribute money on behalf of the Government.  Councillor Palmer welcomed the opportunity to help vulnerable residents.  Councillor Merryweather welcomed the proposals.

RESOLVED that an addendum to the Discretionary Energy Rebate Scheme under the eligibility criteria be approved as follows:

The fund can also be used to give an award to any pensioners who are in receipt of Council Tax Support without the need for an application process.  This will result in 2,000 awards of £55, to each pensioner.

Reason:

Waverley has been allocated discretionary funding of £216,600 to support those suffering financial hardship as a result of the rising energy cost. In the event of an overspend, no additional funding will be provided from government. Therefore, the discretionary scheme criteria was set to support the most vulnerable that has not had a payment from the main scheme. The remaining funding can now be targeted to pensioners as a small topup without the need for an application process. 

The scheme is widely published and available on the Waverley website. It is promoted by officers from Council Tax, Benefits, Housing, Communication and by local charities and councillors.

Purpose of this report:

·       Is to provide members with an overview of the proposed new build housing schemes which are in a position to deliver through entry into a build contract with a contractor.

·       Seek member approval to the recommendations made for each project as set out in business cases within Annexe 1 using the financial strategy as set out in the Housing Revenue Account Business Plan Strategic Review Report and Annexes 1-3.

·       Seek member approval of the revised budgets as set out in Annexe 2.

Recommendation

2.1      It is recommended that the Executive, consider this report and information within the Annexes and make the following recommendations to Council as set out in business cases in Annexe 1 of this report and summarised Annexe 2.

·       Annexe 1a - Site C Ockford Ridge, Godalming – members previously approved budgets for the scheme in annual Budget Council Meeting for the delivery of 30 new homes and retrospective approval is sought for transparency of the total scheme cost (full cost not previously reported) supported by the viability assessment and net revenue impact in the business case

·       Annexe 1b - Aarons Hill, Godalming – members approve the delivery of 4 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1c - Hartsgrove, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 5 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1d - Pathfield, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 11 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1e - Queens Mead, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 8 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1f -Turners Mead, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 2 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1g - Riverside Court, Farnham – members approve the delivery of 2 new homes and the scheme cost

·       Annexe 1h – Woodside Park, Cattershall Lane – members approve the delivery of 12 new homes and scheme costs

2.2      It is recommended that Executive approve the budgets for each scheme totalling £21,252,208m as set out in Annexe 2.

RESOLVED that the Executive recommends to Council

1.     the following be approved as set out in business cases in Annexe 1 of the report and summarised in Annexe 2:

·       Annexe 1a - Site C Ockford Ridge, Godalming – members previously approved budgets for the scheme in annual Budget Council Meeting for the delivery of 30 new homes and retrospective approval is sought for transparency of the total scheme cost (full cost not previously reported) supported by the viability assessment and net revenue impact in the business case

·       Annexe 1b - Aarons Hill, Godalming – members approve the delivery of 4 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1c - Hartsgrove, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 5 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1d - Pathfield, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 11 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1e - Queens Mead, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 8 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1f -Turners Mead, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 2 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1g - Riverside Court, Farnham – members approve the delivery of 2 new homes and the scheme cost

·       Annexe 1h – Woodside Park, Cattershall Lane – members approve the delivery of 12 new homes and scheme costs.

2.     the budgets for each scheme totalling £21,252,208m be approved as set out in Annexe 2.

Reason:

To seek Full Council approval for the development projects described in this report and Annexe 1 a–h as part of the council’s new affordable homes programme financed in compliance with the HRA Business Plan Strategic Review report.

[This is a recommendation to Council and therefore not subject to call-in]

Councillor Palmer, Co-Portfolio Holder for Housing (Delivery) presented the report which set out detailed proposals for a number of new build housing schemes.  A number of assumptions had been made, including that right to buy would reduce the long term assets created by the construction.  All proposals were financially viable and met the Council’s strategic priority to provide affordable homes.

Councillor Mulliner spoke on this item, including the way in which these projects were presented and wondered whether the assumptions were sufficiently cautious.

In response, Councillor Palmer advised that a balance had to be struck between what could realistically be achieved and the reserves which would be retained.  It was felt that the assumptions were appropriate and he welcomed future monitoring of the position.

Councillor Williams welcomed the proposals which would provide genuinely affordable and energy efficient homes for those in need.  The Leader echoed the comments and welcomed the proposals.

RESOLVED that the Executive recommends to Council

1.     the following be approved as set out in business cases in Annexe 1 of the report and summarised in Annexe 2:

·       Annexe 1a - Site C Ockford Ridge, Godalming – members previously approved budgets for the scheme in annual Budget Council Meeting for the delivery of 30 new homes and retrospective approval is sought for transparency of the total scheme cost (full cost not previously reported) supported by the viability assessment and net revenue impact in the business case

·       Annexe 1b - Aarons Hill, Godalming – members approve the delivery of 4 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1c - Hartsgrove, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 5 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1d - Pathfield, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 11 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1e - Queens Mead, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 8 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1f -Turners Mead, Chiddingfold – members approve the delivery of 2 new homes and scheme costs

·       Annexe 1g - Riverside Court, Farnham – members approve the delivery of 2 new homes and the scheme cost

·       Annexe 1h – Woodside Park, Cattershall Lane – members approve the delivery of 12 new homes and scheme costs.

2.     the budgets for each scheme totalling £21,252,208m be approved as set out in Annexe 2.

Reason:

To seek Full Council approval for the development projects described in this report and Annexe 1 a–h as part of the council’s new affordable homes programme financed in compliance with the HRA Business Plan Strategic Review report.

Council on the 19 October 2021 agreed the funding for a project at Wey Court East in Farnham to facilitate its use and secure a lease.  This report updates members on the progress of that project.

Due to commercial sensitivities the detail is provided in exempt annexe 1.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Executive:

1)    Note the new lease proposals to be approved under the Scheme of Delegation by the Executive Head of Assets and Property.

2)    Give approval for further funding as detailed in exempt annexe 1.

3)    Delegates to the Executive Head of Assets and Property the tendering and entering into contract and associated agreements for the delivery of the works required.

RESOLVED that

1.     The new lease proposals to be approved under the Scheme of Delegation by the Executive Head of Assets and Property be noted;

2.     further funding be approved as detailed in exempt annexe 1; and

3.     authority be delegated to the Executive Head of Assets and Property the tendering and entering into contract and associated agreements for the delivery of the works required.

Reason:

The reason is set out in the exempt annexe 1.

[Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee]

Councillor Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets presented the report which set out lease proposals for the property and thanked the officers involved for their work in securing a sustainable long-term outcome for the property.

Councillor Hyman welcomed the solution proposal although expressed concern over the cost and he requested a discussion in an exempt session.  The Leader advised that he intended to discuss the item in public and suggested that Councillor Hyman discuss any queries with the Portfolio Holder after the meeting.

Councillor Mulliner asked a question on the following item which would be dealt with under that item.

RESOLVED that

1.     The new lease proposals to be approved under the Scheme of Delegation by the Executive Head of Assets and Property be noted;

2.     further funding be approved as detailed in exempt annexe 1; and

3.     authority be delegated to the Executive Head of Assets and Property the tendering and entering into contract and associated agreements for the delivery of the works required.

Reason:

The reason is set out in the exempt annexe 1.

To inform the Executive of the objectives, risks and governance arrangements for the regeneration project at 69 High Street Godalming.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Executive note the Project Initiation Document (PID).

RESOLVED that the Project Initiation Document (PID) be noted.

Reason:

To comply with approval and governance arrangements as defined within the PID.

[This report is for noting and therefore not subject to call-in]

Councillor Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets presented the report which set out an update on the project for development of 69 High Street, Godalming.  The inflation figure in the document would be updated to reflect current inflation assumptions.

Councillor Mulliner welcomed the correction of the figure.

RESOLVED that the Project Initiation Document (PID) be noted.

Reason:

To comply with approval and governance arrangements as defined within the PID.

The purpose of this report is to update the Executive on the examination of LPP2 and to outline how LPP2 will be progressed as quickly as possible to adoption.

The Inspector has advised that he considers no further Main Modifications (MMs), over and above those already discussed through the hearing sessions, are necessary to make the plan sound and/or legally compliant.

The Inspector will not be issuing a post-hearings letter and has instead asked the Council to finalise the schedule of MMs and to proceed with public consultation. He will take account of representations on the MMs in finalising his report.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Executive notes the draft schedule of Main Modifications (MMs) at Annexe 1 and the indicative timetable for finalising LPP2 in section 5 of this report.

RESOLVED that the draft schedule of Main Modifications (MMs) at Annexe 1 and the indicative timetable for finalising LPP2 in section 5 of the report be noted.

Reason:

To alert the Executive to the Main Modifications that the Inspector currently considers necessary to make LPP2 sound and/or legally compliant and to enable the planning policy team to prioritise work on the final stages of preparing LPP2.

[This report is for noting and therefore not subject to call-in]

Councillor Liz Townsend, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Economic Development presented the report, which provided an update on the Local Plan Part 2 examination.  The Inspector was largely content with the schedule of main modifications in Annexe 1, nor had any concerns been raised with legal compliance.  Although the Inspector’s final report was awaited, it was not expected that any additional sites would be required to be identified.  Officers hoped that the main modifications would strengthen and enhance Local Plan Part 2 and consultation would take place on those between 9 December and  27 January 2023.  The Inspector’s final report was expected in February and would be considered by Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Executive before being adopted by the Council.

The Leader welcomed the report and thanked officers for their work.

Councillor Hyman spoke on the report and the requirement for an appropriate assessment.

In response, the Leader advised that the Inspector had been very clear in his response and what his expectations were in terms of information to be provided and the planning policy team would be carrying out that work.

Councillor Townsend reiterated that the sustainability assessment and habitats appraisal would be prepared and would form part of the consultation and Councillors would have every opportunity to comment on those and all comments would be considered by the Inspector.

RESOLVED that the draft schedule of Main Modifications (MMs) at Annexe 1 and the indicative timetable for finalising LPP2 in section 5 of the report be noted.

Reason:

To alert the Executive to the Main Modifications that the Inspector currently considers necessary to make LPP2 sound and/or legally compliant and to enable the planning policy team to prioritise work on the final stages of preparing LPP2.